Daily Times

This is heretical to Pakistan’s civil society elite; or perhaps not, depending where lies their present fancy, Nawaz Sharif or Imran Khan. Choices beyond are unmentionable: the Chaudhries, a Maulana from some of the various factions that inhabit Pakistan’s political scene, or a breakaway Makhdoom from the main fold of the larger political parties. And yet, every time that Pakistanis sit together to lament the state of their country, and when bolder, to seek a way out, they stumble across the leadership conundrum.

Recent weeks have been kinder; only the Pakistanis have shellacked Pakistan — both India and the US have been rather self-consumed; the US with its fiscal and budgetary woes, and India dazzled by our foreign minister (pun intended for both the FM and India). Handled with kid’s gloves and oodles of media attention it was a case made for, “anokha ladla khelan ko maange chaand” (the unique spoilt one wants to play with the moon). Wait till you hear more from Bollywood.

Of our recent desires within the country our death wish is to somehow make a case for Article 190: all institutions of the state (read army) to come to the assistance of the superior courts in implementing its decisions. That would be kind of strange because just about a few weeks back we all, liberal and conservative as well as neutrals, had lambasted the military as ‘the’ problem of our state. You can hear this still across most op-ed pages. Why in the world would we then like to invite the same military to assist the most revered institution, the judiciary? That is a mismatch for sure; and the history of such union is not good either. Just ask Mian Nawaz Sharif of the PMLN. And to what purpose? To dislodge a democratic government through the judiciary-military combine? Horror of horrors; it is sacrilegious even to consider. Yet we clamour for it.

We make a strong case against our democratic government on corruption too. It is rampant without a doubt in its multifarious forms. The elite remain its principal beneficiaries; particularly when almost zero benefit has gone to the people because of the eminent absence of governance in the last three years. It sure makes the case stronger but then what is the alternative; more of the same? Who in the stock would you imagine to lead the nation away from its predicaments? Any election, full or medium-term will only bring forth the same faces. Sometime they sit on the right and at other times on the left of the aisle. It is a matter of shared stakes for this polity; to consider that somehow a change of face may mean a change of fortunes is the most fallacious but often travelled road. Each want their turn at the till and that alone is what matters to this brand of polity. It is such a frustrating but equally foregone conclusion that it only engenders further despondence. Those who take up cudgels on behalf of the people in the popular media by themselves reflect the privileged. What remains a hogwash of a popular appeal is the pain that each of these worthies feels for the poor and the dispossessed.

Leave the people aside; they have been duped often and without relent. Consider the state; it almost sits on the brink of a grand failure. Our stock in the world today is in the pits in practically every facet of statehood, and yet not an eyebrow moves on such misfortune. Practically all players of this great circus, which we like to call variously as democracy and a government sanctified by an electoral process, are out to carve their own pound of flesh — euphemism for intimate proximity to the till. If by any chance we are driven by an illusion that the alternate in power will mean greater fidelity, it shall remain the most quoted case for exemplary self-delusion. Perhaps, there remains no other choice; we must hold onto every hope that comes our way, but then soon enough it shall be the same again. Somewhere out there the gods remain entirely unhappy with our doings. We know what ails, but can do precious little to alleviate it. In such matters, escapism remains our only option and this gets manifested in rampant accusations as indeed in seeking false dawns and raising ordinaries to demigods.

States and nations remain tied in only so many mechanisms of interplay and God knows we have tried all. Yet we search for that super-kernel that just might put our maladies to heal knowing well that none exists. The military is not coming back for if that had been their wont it would have played itself out many times over the last few years of our misfortunes. Imagine the environment that we suffer today in times past and before one woke up the Brigades would have simply marched up the Constitution Avenue. Not this time, leaving the ball fully in the court of our worthies to sort.

We have often made the point that Pakistan sits at its most transformational moment in history. A lot needs to be corrected, paradigmatically and in disposition. With pervasive perfidy that would mean a wholesale change. Who is going to do it? Not this polity bereft of both will and capacity. Not all is bad but what is bad rises as scum drowning the good to the bottom. Tied in hierarchical structures of dynastic politics there is not a chance that younger, brighter minds might just find a mention. A few that do find some prominence become as stale and rotten as fish let to waste. New entrants? No chance. If there was one I would have asked all talk-show pundits to adorn the robes and replace Dastis in parliament. It is another matter if they too would soon be flavoured similarly. More likely since that is the nature and tradition of our political destiny.

My mind goes repeatedly back to the one-time American Senator, Barack Obama, who through sheer brilliance of modern-day campaign planning, not to mention his intellectual brilliance and oratory, emerged as the president of the US. Just as he is up for re-election more than a year from now his campaign has already kicked off, not speechifying since that still remains in the future, but resurrecting his campaign offices all across the US with its band of volunteers bidding on his behalf for electoral preparation, awareness, commitment and financial donations. Our very own Imran Khan, no match by any stretch of imagination, but surprisingly the more often stated savoir against other poor choices, continues to remain ambiguous on almost every other issue, making it difficult for the voters to choose between him and the others. ‘Since it is him it should be enough assurance’ could work on a cricket field but not with an oft-bitten and stung electorate. More importantly, he has little organisational detail to support either him or his candidates. It remains a no-brainer that he promises another false dawn.

Pakistan’s political system, parliamentary in nature, is designed to keep outsiders out. Reversal of such inherent consequence is perhaps the greatest transformational change that is needed and, if made, can bring promise home. The military will change, has changed, but in the end it is the politicos alone who can deliver. To do so, politics will need to drastically reform.

The writer is a political and defence analyst